If fluffies were being developed in real life how strongly would you support it

If fluffies were being developed in real life how strongly would you support it? (Assuming that the peta raid either never happened or failed)

  • Shut up and take my money
  • Strongly support
  • Support
  • Weakly support
  • Weakly oppose
  • Oppose
  • Strongly oppose
  • get the shotgun.
  • usually I’d oppose chemical warfare, but…
  • “We can start a nuclear war!”*
  • Neutral/Unsure

0 voters

Source*

Complete History Of The Soviet Union, Arranged To The Melody Of Tetris - YouTube

9 Likes

shut and take my fucking money

6 Likes

Creatures with human sapience (as opposed to cognitive intelligence, which fluffies lack) in their feelings and ideas of family/happiness/afterlife (skettiland) would have fundamental natural rights, but if they are bred to be fragile and cheap, and if they lacked any civil rights, then creating them would be utterly immoral.

13 Likes

Genetic manipulation is some fucked up yet awesome shit. We got puppies who can glow in the dark thanks to this, how cool is that? but it’s so weird and might fuck up the whole natural order talking about echosystems and such, one of the most popular topics here are fluffies as a pest, wich is not too far from reality, many pets kill native animals when released on the wild by owner who don’t want them anymore, goldfish being one of the worst pests ever found in ponds and aniqquilating anything on their way.

So while it might be really interesting, thinking in the future consequences I’m pretty unsure about it.

8 Likes

Absolutely not.
Doesn’t matter if the intentions are noble, sooner or later they will go feral and the consequences of their extremely rapid breeding would destroy ecosystems and agricultural output.

Their ability to be vectors for nasty diseases would mean that only the wealthy can afford the constant barrage of unsanitary conditions while the poor will start dropping like flies.

5 Likes

Sanitation - Our World in Data.
you say that like it isn’t already happening

2 Likes

Majority of that is in developing countries, mainly Africa.
In first world countries, not a problem to such an extent. Unless we add fluffies to it.

3 Likes

the USA makes 85 cubic kilometers of wastewater every year,
I really doubt fluffies could push that over a critical mass

2 Likes

I would support it, because it will open the door to more advanced biological research. I would rather have a moon infrastructure, but I guess anything that moves science forward is good

4 Likes

It’s not about quantity, it’s about proximity.

Many fluffies would be close to human habitation, just because that’s where the food is. Food equals shit, shit equals diseases. Just like rats and pest control.

Doubt many have wastewater running through their streets, if they do, they are probably sick alot.

4 Likes

But you’re forgetting something, the fluffies had been unleashed to the world and became feral and bred so much because of PETA, however, OP didn’t specify if PETA had raided Hasbio in our universe or not.

3 Likes

I did actually,

(Assuming that the peta raid either never happened or failed)

2 Likes

Oh okay.

3 Likes

well…

2 Likes

Do you really believe fluffys can live in the wild for any length of time

4 Likes

Individually no, as an introduced species, yes. In a boom and crash cycle.

4 Likes

No a fluffy has no way of living in the wild you can’t just throw a million fluffys in to the wild and have them magically survive in the real world

1 Like

This is from some thousands homeless. Now how many would be needed if, lets say you had 1’000’000 of them? Same with fluffies, it’s the sheer quantity. Note: I’m now talking from the headcanon that they have this extreme reproductivity.

That the city needs to use funds to sanitize streets instead off using it on healthcare, education or infrastructure projects is also concerning.

3 Likes

Why can’t they survive in nature?

1 Like

I feel like a shotgun doesn’t emphasize how much I disagree with their creation.

flame

6 Likes